Influence of Sleep Deprivation and Auditory Intensity on Reaction Time and Response Force

Arousal and activation are two variables supposed to underlie change in response force. This study was undertaken to explain these roles, specifically, for strong auditory stimuli and sleep deficit. Loud auditory stimuli can evoke phasic over-arousal whereas sleep deficit leads to general underarousal. Moreover, Van der Molen and Keuss. (1979, 1981) showed that paradoxically long reaction times occurred with extremely strong auditory stimuli when the task was difficult, e.g., choice reaction or Simon paradigm. It was argued that this paradoxical behavior related to reaction time is due to active disconnecting of the coupling between arousal and activation to prevent false responses. If so, we predicted that for extremely loud stimuli and for difficult tasks, the lengthening of reaction time should be associated with reduction of response force. The effects of loudness and sleep deficit on response time and force were investigated in three different tasks: simple response, choice response, and Simon paradigm. According to our expectation, we found a detrimental effect of sleep deficit on reaction time and on response force. In contrast to Van der Molen and Keuss, we found no increase in reaction time for loud stimuli (up to 110 dB) even on the Simon task.

[1]  F J Steyvers,et al.  The influence of sleep deprivation and knowledge of results on perceptual encoding. , 1987, Acta psychologica.

[2]  D. Pins,et al.  On the relation between stimulus intensity and processing time: Piéron’s law and choice reaction time , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[3]  N R BARTLETT,et al.  Effect of flash and field luminance upon human reaction time. , 1954, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[4]  P. Jaśkowski,et al.  Effect of Sleep Deficit, Knowledge of Results, and Stimulus Quality on Reaction Time and Response Force , 1997, Perceptual and motor skills.

[5]  A. Angel,et al.  Input-Output Relations in Simple Reaction Time Experiments , 1973, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[6]  G. P. van Galen,et al.  Stress, neuromotor noise, and human performance : A theoretical perspective , 1997 .

[7]  Rolf Ulrich,et al.  Donders's assumption of pure insertion: an evaluation on the basis of response dynamics , 1999 .

[8]  R Verleger,et al.  The influence of time pressure and cue validity on response force in an S1-S2 paradigm. , 2000, Acta psychologica.

[9]  A F Sanders,et al.  An additive factor analysis of the effects of sleep loss on reaction processes. , 1982, Acta psychologica.

[10]  Rolf Verleger,et al.  Influence of Time Pressure in a Simple Response Task, a Choice- by-Location Task, and the Simon Task , 2001 .

[11]  J Miller,et al.  Effects of stimulus duration and intensity on simple reaction time and response force. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  R. Verleger,et al.  A Clock Paradigm to Study the Relationship between Expectancy and Response Force , 1993, Perceptual and motor skills.

[13]  M. W. van der Molen,et al.  Response Selection and the Processing of Auditory Intensity , 1981 .

[14]  R. Mansfield,et al.  Latency functions in human vision. , 1973, Vision research.

[15]  M.A.E. van Huygevoort,et al.  Error, stress and the role of neuromotor noise in space oriented behaviour , 2000, Biological Psychology.

[16]  J. L. Santee,et al.  Auditory reaction time as a function of stimulus intensity, frequency, and rise time , 1977 .

[17]  F. Jaroszyk,et al.  The effect of stimulus intensity on force output in simple reaction time task in humans. , 1995, Acta neurobiologiae experimentalis.

[18]  M Giray,et al.  Motor coactivation revealed by response force in divided and focused attention. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[19]  A. Sanders.  Towards a model of stress and human performance. , 1983, Acta psychologica.

[20]  Jeff Miller,et al.  Effects of auditory stimulus intensity on response force in simple, go/no-go, and choice RT tasks , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[21]  H. Frowein,et al.  Selective effects of barbiturate and amphetamine on information processing and response execution. , 1981, Acta psychologica.

[22]  M. W. van der Molen,et al.  Positive and negative effects of stimulus intensity in auditory reaction tasks: further studies on immediate arousal. , 1982, Acta psychologica.

[23]  Gerard P. van Galen,et al.  Fitts' law as the outcome of a dynamic noise filtering model of motor control , 1995 .

[24]  M. W. van der Molen,et al.  The Relationship between Reaction Time and Intensity in Discrete Auditory Tasks , 1979, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[25]  Rolf Ulrich,et al.  Effects of Response Probability on Response Force in Simple RT , 1997 .

[26]  A. Gaillard,et al.  The effects of sleep deprivation and incentives on human performance , 1993, Psychological research.